Fascinating stuff, this Leah Remini show. Granted, it's slow AF, and the delivery is sometimes annoying, but I find it fascinating, all the rules/laws L. Ron wrote and they still follow, how they appear to try to ruin/dismantle the lives of any people who either leave their clutches or try to discredit them from the outside.
I find it completely amazing that so many people are so easily drawn in by this and other cults.
The more you learn, the more crazy it looks.
If you're a BBI Scientologist/Cult member, sorry/not sorry.
Quote:
In comment 13554074 Heisenberg said:
Quote:
In comment 13554062 Eli Wilson said:
Quote:
In comment 13554042 Heisenberg said:
Quote:
.
No idea. Does it really matter? I could care less. If his leg remained broken and he needed surgery would that have changed my beliefs? No.
Like I said bad shit happens everywhere.
Exactly, you are solid in your beliefs. That's totally cool with me. It's just then that I'd like to offer the viewpoint that your story is not evidence of God at all but rather a way that you found affirmation of your beliefs. So, I'm happy the kid's ankle was ok and that your beliefs were affirmed but the story is not evidence of anything. If you had x rays that that were broken and then xrays the next day that were healed, well now you're onto something but that literally never happens.
Just curious... How can you be certain that it literally never happens?
Well, as that would bring into question everything we have learned in the past couple thousand years about bones, healing and the human body, I'd suspect it would be a big deal.
Well firstly, it wouldn't bring into question anything we know about bones, healing and the human body - because supposedly, the healing was supernatural.
What is your first assumption upon hearing a story like that? Most likely, that its some kind of hoax and you'd dismiss it and move on with your day. Most people would react the same way. So why would any main stream media source bother to run such a story? Their job is to keep your attention.
Accelerating, not the effect of a primal Big Bang.
Scientists can account for something less than a trillionth of the energy required to do this.
I'm not saying that is proof of God.
There is a profound limit to our scientific understanding.
Stay humble.
Quote:
In comment 13554084 Brown Recluse said:
Quote:
In comment 13554074 Heisenberg said:
Quote:
In comment 13554062 Eli Wilson said:
Quote:
In comment 13554042 Heisenberg said:
Quote:
.
No idea. Does it really matter? I could care less. If his leg remained broken and he needed surgery would that have changed my beliefs? No.
Like I said bad shit happens everywhere.
Exactly, you are solid in your beliefs. That's totally cool with me. It's just then that I'd like to offer the viewpoint that your story is not evidence of God at all but rather a way that you found affirmation of your beliefs. So, I'm happy the kid's ankle was ok and that your beliefs were affirmed but the story is not evidence of anything. If you had x rays that that were broken and then xrays the next day that were healed, well now you're onto something but that literally never happens.
Just curious... How can you be certain that it literally never happens?
Well, as that would bring into question everything we have learned in the past couple thousand years about bones, healing and the human body, I'd suspect it would be a big deal.
Well firstly, it wouldn't bring into question anything we know about bones, healing and the human body - because supposedly, the healing was supernatural.
What is your first assumption upon hearing a story like that? Most likely, that its some kind of hoax and you'd dismiss it and move on with your day. Most people would react the same way. So why would any main stream media source bother to run such a story? Their job is to keep your attention.
The scenario I referenced is confirmed xray broken leg bone one day, confirmed by xray healed leg bone the next. That would not be something easily dismissed. That would be news. That would be significant and people would study the circumstances that surrounded it and try to understand it. This would have evidence - the before and after xrays - that would need to be explained. That would be truly miraculous. In that case, God would be a possible solution. But this has never happened.
Eli Wilson's story of folks vomiting and running over to him saying a leg snapped and it turning out to not be snapped is altogether a different story. This one is pretty reasonable to dismiss as there's no evidence that anything other than a misdiagnosis on the field happened.
As for the "mainstream media", it's nice to write them off as not being interested. This would be huge news because it would shake the foundation of modern medicine. Lots of hoaxy stories make it into the mainstream media, and this would be a big one.
I've never seen anything like that happen but I wouldn't rule it out or say it never has. But then again I also believe there is a higher power, and that if that power can create an entire universe - surely it can heal a broken bone...though I don't know what grandiose purpose that would serve.
I can't say whether its happened or not, but I guess the bigger point I was making is that if it did - I think its logical to assume you won't hear about it from any reputable news outlet.
Quote:
In comment 13553807 RobCarpenter said:
Quote:
In comment 13553795 ThatLimerickGuy said:
Quote:
That scientology is basically just a very well planned out tax evasion scam.
+1
They all are.
My religion predates the U.S. tax code by doezens, if not thousands, of years.
Touché
I've never seen anything like that happen but I wouldn't rule it out or say it never has. But then again I also believe there is a higher power, and that if that power can create an entire universe - surely it can heal a broken bone...though I don't know what grandiose purpose that would serve.
I can't say whether its happened or not, but I guess the bigger point I was making is that if it did - I think its logical to assume you won't hear about it from any reputable news outlet.
Horseshit. The idea that it's logical to assume you wouldn't hear about something previously unheard of is not logical at all. The very definition of news is something that happens that is new. This would be new. To have evidence of a miracle would be news. The idea that an ER doc or orthopedic surgeon wouldn't be interested in a miraculous healing of a bone despite the fact that it defies all they learned in med school and after med school as they specialized in these things, utterly strains belief.
To blame the lack of hearing about miracles on the media a handy way to believe in unproven things because you can believe that the mainstream media is a cloud obscuring hidden truths. The fact is the reverse is true. Most people believe in a religion and actual evidence that miracles happen would be a huge fucking story.
Quote:
In comment 13553995 Eli Wilson said:
Quote:
In comment 13553991 Heisenberg said:
Quote:
In comment 13553989 Eli Wilson said:
Quote:
BS, mind over matter?
You can call BS on me if you want, but this legit happened 2 years ago:
My son, then a senior in high school, was playing football. There was a few minutes left in the game and his team was running out the clock. He was the trusted RB for this type of situation.
Anyways, he went down with a leg injury, an obvious clean break jusy above the ankle. Two kids on his team threw up on the field, one ran for the ambulance, one - who's Mom was a Dr ran to the crowd and yelled to his Mom - "Mom, its Tim! His leg is snapped! Its disgusting!"
By the time my wife and I got to the sideline, they had him loaded in the ambulance. There was a Dr with the ambulance crew that told us his leg was broken. The coach came over, with the game still going on, to talk to us. He said he saw the whole thing and was pretty shook. He was hoping Tim would be OK for baseball season, which was 6 months away.
From the time he went down with the injury, until we got to the hospital, I prayed.
When he got to the hospital they gave him morphine and took him right in to get XRays. When he got back to the room, I looked at his leg, and it didnt look too bad. Perhaps a little swolen.
Anyways, the Dr came in with the Xrays and told us there was no break. I asked him if he could have a radiologist check, because 5 people and my son himself told me they saw his leg bent at 90 degrees in a place where that waw not possible. He said that wasnt necessary, and sent him home. The next day I took him to the local sports medicine location, which is open on the weekend for sports injuries. They couldnt find a break either and said maybe it was sprained.
He wasnt in much pain, and by Wedesday was back at football practice. He played in the next game, and the rest of the year.
Is there a reasonable explanation for this? We give credit to our God. Is that foolish? Were all the people who saw his injury up close, including a Dr, wrong or does he have magic bones?
At the end of the year football banquet, the coach gave him a special award for "toughness", because in his words he was just hoping Tim would be able to walk again after seeing his injury, much less play in the next game.
Because you didn't understand how or why something happened is not evidence of an intervention by a God.
True. But do you have an alternate explanation?
He had a bad sprain and everyone at the field, relying on their eyes, overreacted. Sterling Shepard had a bad sprain earlier this week and there was concern he might be out for a long time. He practiced today. Did God heal him too?
Based on his Instagram post the next day I'm going with yes, but honestly I haven't asked him.
So "god" healed your son but let countless devoted christians, Jews, Muslims, Druids, pagans and satanists die in awful fashion?
With all due respect......
Quote:
In comment 13553741 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
theology is stupid. I think there should be a natural curiosity of where we originated and where we are going.
I think what is stupid is using theology to craft and enforce social mores, and that's pretty much what all religions do.
We shouldn't commit adultery out of decency, not because there were supposedly stone tablets saying not to. My issue is that instead of people using common sense to dictate behavior, they are often influenced or guilted into behaviors that have been translated, mutated and misinterpreted from centuries ago.
I feel like I fall into a gray area where I have faith, but no beholdance to religion. I believe in a higher power and am very curious how our origins came about and if there's an afterlife, but I have utter disdain for anyone trying to dictate what my beliefs or behaviors should be. Part of being a human is having the ability to think for oneself and make my own decisions.
At its best - organized religion acts as a support structure for those who can't lead their own way. At its worst, religion is a vehicle (and a protected one at that) to bilk people out of money, brainwash their thinking and control their actions. All organized religions do this in some form.
I agree. I believe in a god or higher power, but don't think any can know the nature of god is or what it wants from us - if anything. That why I think Theology is stupid. That and the fact that it creates wars between peoples who pretty much believe in the same morals anyway.
I get that theology helped to ingrain these morals into barbaric, tribal peoples in ancient and mideivel times. People at those times weren't going to work to build a better society unless they thought it would grant them ever lasting peace after they died. But now we know the benifits of a peaceful society, so I still believe thelogy is stupid.
The true value of religions are the lessons they teach us. Judaism's symbolisms and philosophies, Jesus's sermons and Christianities 7 virtues and deadly sins, Islams Five Pillars, Buddhism's meditations. All have made life a little better where they were taught.
Scientology's lesson is - abandon your family and pay us money then maybe you can be happy.
This sounds very much like the screed that a person who doesn't believe cannot be a moral/ethical person. Absolute horseshit, of course, but it's a very common view, even among those professing to be Atheists.
BMac, that wasn't my intention. These morals lessons from the main religions have been ingrained into society whether you believe in the Theology or not (I don't). You don't need to be a follower to benefit from yhe Golden Rule and the Judgement of Solomon.
Its people that create these lessons, not gods. They just used religion to get everyone to listen back then. You probably never believed Hansel and Grettle were real people, but I bet you still learned as a child not to trust strange old ladies offering candy in the woods.
Its just stories and lessons written by very smart and creative people who were trying to aid society. True many eventually profitted from them, causing rifts that bred new religions that were also eventually perverted for profits - but the stories and morals remain.
No one wants to hear stories like that unless there is evidence, and there isn't any in your scenario. If the bone is healed, then all evidence disappears along with the break. An x-ray is not evidence of anything. Even with "evidence," it would be a hard sell. I'm not sure whats so hard to understand about that.
The idea that a miracle healing took place and would want to be studied makes sense, but realistically its not likely to happen based on a couple of x-rays and the word of some some local physician and his patient.
No one wants to hear stories like that unless there is evidence, and there isn't any in your scenario. If the bone is healed, then all evidence disappears along with the break. An x-ray is not evidence of anything. Even with "evidence," it would be a hard sell. I'm not sure whats so hard to understand about that.
The idea that a miracle healing took place and would want to be studied makes sense, but realistically its not likely to happen based on a couple of x-rays and the word of some some local physician and his patient.
An xray of a broken leg on friday followed by an x ray of the same healed leg on saturday wouldn't be evidence that something unusual happened? What a weird position to take. Of course it would be evidence.
Here is a snippet from Mark Twain's essay "Concerning the Jews" published in 1899...
I am persuaded that in Russia, Austria, and Germany nine-tenths of the hostility to the Jew comes from the average Christian's inability to compete successfully with the average Jew in business - in either straight business or the questionable sort. In Berlin, a few years ago, I read a speech which frankly urged the expulsion of the Jews from Germany; and the agitator's reason was as frank as his proposition.
It was this: that eighty-five per cent. of the successful lawyers of Berlin were Jews, and that about the same percentage of the great and lucrative businesses of all sorts in Germany were in the hands of the Jewish race! Isn't it an amazing confession? It was but another way of saying that in a population of 48,000,000, of whom only 500,000 were registered as Jews, eight-five per cent. of the brains and honesty of the whole was lodged in the Jews.
I must insist upon the honesty - it is an essential of successful business, taken by and large. Of course it does not rule out rascals entirely, even among Christians, but it is a good working rule, nevertheless. The speaker's figures may have been inexact, but the motive of persecution stands out as clear as day. The man claimed that in Berlin the banks, the newspapers, the theatres, the great mercantile, shipping, mining, and manufacturing interests, the big army and city contracts, the tramways, and pretty much all other properties of high value, and also the small businesses, were in the hands of the Jews.
He said the Jew was pushing the Christian to the wall all along the line; that it was all a Christian could do to scrape together a living; and that the Jew must be banished, and soon - there was no other way of saving the Christian.
Here in Vienna, last autumn, an agitator said that all these disastrous details were true of Austria-Hungary also; and in fierce language he demanded the expulsion of the Jews. When politicians come out without a blush and read the baby act in this frank way, unrebuked, it is a very good indication that they have a market back of them, and know where to fish for votes. You note the crucial point of the mentioned agitation; the argument is that the Christian cannot compete with the Jew, and that hence his very bread is in peril. To human beings this is a much more hate-inspiring thing than is any detail connected with religion.
With most people, of a necessity, bread and meat take first rank, religion second. I am convinced that the persecution of the Jew is not due in any large degree to religious prejudice. No, the Jew is a money-getter; and in getting his money he is a very serious obstruction to less capable neighbors who are on the same quest. I think that that is the trouble.
The full essay can be found here... - ( New Window )
Quote:
nor am I *blaming* the media for anything.
No one wants to hear stories like that unless there is evidence, and there isn't any in your scenario. If the bone is healed, then all evidence disappears along with the break. An x-ray is not evidence of anything. Even with "evidence," it would be a hard sell. I'm not sure whats so hard to understand about that.
The idea that a miracle healing took place and would want to be studied makes sense, but realistically its not likely to happen based on a couple of x-rays and the word of some some local physician and his patient.
An x-ray of a broken leg on friday followed by an x ray of the same healed leg on saturday wouldn't be evidence that something unusual happened? What a weird position to take. Of course it would be evidence.
Do you think anyone on this site would consider that evidence?
#FlatEarth #Google
But Farrakhan has become a scientologist and so has the whole Nation of Islam under his leadership
Here is a snippet from Mark Twain's essay "Concerning the Jews" published in 1899...
Quote:
I feel convinced that the Crucifixion has not much to do with the world's attitude towards the Jew; that the reasons for it are older than that event, as suggested by Egypt's experience and by Rome's regret for having persecuted an unknown quantity called a Christian, under the mistaken impression that she was merely persecuting a Jew. Merely a Jew - a skinned eel who was used to it, presumably.
I am persuaded that in Russia, Austria, and Germany nine-tenths of the hostility to the Jew comes from the average Christian's inability to compete successfully with the average Jew in business - in either straight business or the questionable sort. In Berlin, a few years ago, I read a speech which frankly urged the expulsion of the Jews from Germany; and the agitator's reason was as frank as his proposition.
It was this: that eighty-five per cent. of the successful lawyers of Berlin were Jews, and that about the same percentage of the great and lucrative businesses of all sorts in Germany were in the hands of the Jewish race! Isn't it an amazing confession? It was but another way of saying that in a population of 48,000,000, of whom only 500,000 were registered as Jews, eight-five per cent. of the brains and honesty of the whole was lodged in the Jews.
I must insist upon the honesty - it is an essential of successful business, taken by and large. Of course it does not rule out rascals entirely, even among Christians, but it is a good working rule, nevertheless. The speaker's figures may have been inexact, but the motive of persecution stands out as clear as day. The man claimed that in Berlin the banks, the newspapers, the theatres, the great mercantile, shipping, mining, and manufacturing interests, the big army and city contracts, the tramways, and pretty much all other properties of high value, and also the small businesses, were in the hands of the Jews.
He said the Jew was pushing the Christian to the wall all along the line; that it was all a Christian could do to scrape together a living; and that the Jew must be banished, and soon - there was no other way of saving the Christian.
Here in Vienna, last autumn, an agitator said that all these disastrous details were true of Austria-Hungary also; and in fierce language he demanded the expulsion of the Jews. When politicians come out without a blush and read the baby act in this frank way, unrebuked, it is a very good indication that they have a market back of them, and know where to fish for votes. You note the crucial point of the mentioned agitation; the argument is that the Christian cannot compete with the Jew, and that hence his very bread is in peril. To human beings this is a much more hate-inspiring thing than is any detail connected with religion.
With most people, of a necessity, bread and meat take first rank, religion second. I am convinced that the persecution of the Jew is not due in any large degree to religious prejudice. No, the Jew is a money-getter; and in getting his money he is a very serious obstruction to less capable neighbors who are on the same quest. I think that that is the trouble.
The full essay can be found here... - ( New Window )
There is a race of jews that is not jewish? I don't understand the difference between jewish the religion and jewish the race.
I admit I'm not an expert, but I thought it was one in the same.
If those people who owned those businesses and were successful lawyers had been christian would they still be of the jewish race?
BMac, that wasn't my intention. These morals lessons from the main religions have been ingrained into society whether you believe in the Theology or not (I don't). You don't need to be a follower to benefit from yhe Golden Rule and the Judgement of Solomon.
Its people that create these lessons, not gods. They just used religion to get everyone to listen back then. You probably never believed Hansel and Grettle were real people, but I bet you still learned as a child not to trust strange old ladies offering candy in the woods.
Its just stories and lessons written by very smart and creative people who were trying to aid society. True many eventually profitted from them, causing rifts that bred new religions that were also eventually perverted for profits - but the stories and morals remain.
Eh, I dont buy it. Religions incorporate the low hanging fruit. Dont murder people. etc. It doesnt mean we should give them joint credit for the idea of not murdering people. It's kind of insulting to non-believers to imply that but for religions they dont believe in, they're be all about that murder.
I am not the Sultan, and I am not objecting; but if that concentration of the cunningest brains in the world were going to be made in a free country, I think it would be politic to stop it. It will not be well to let the race find out its strength. If the horses knew theirs, we should not ride any more.
There is a race of jews that is not jewish? I don't understand the difference between jewish the religion and jewish the race.
I admit I'm not an expert, but I thought it was one in the same.
If those people who owned those businesses and were successful lawyers had been christian would they still be of the jewish race?
Quote:
There is a race of jews that is not jewish? I don't understand the difference between jewish the religion and jewish the race.
I admit I'm not an expert, but I thought it was one in the same.
If those people who owned those businesses and were successful lawyers had been christian would they still be of the jewish race?
Think of the Jewish race as simply a gene pool (if you like, you can divide the gene pool even further into Ashkenazim and Sephardim, which together make up roughly 90% of all Jews). So one can belong to that gene pool and not practice Judaism or one can practice Judaism without belonging to that gene pool. But it was the "gene pool" which Hitler sought to exterminate, so it mattered little to him what religion the Jew practiced or if he practiced no religion at all.
Should be noted, that guy was NUTS.
the full essay (trigger warning: not politically correct)... - ( New Window )
In spite of the widespread, responsible criticism of dianetic theory, Hubbard was not deterred from promulgating his notions. Faced in 1951 with legal difficulties, he proceeded, as his ex-associate, science-fiction writer and editor John Campbell, Jr. put it, “to get religion”—and the tax advantages inherent in church status. Hubbard’s decision came as no shock to Sam Mos[k]owitz, science-fiction editor and author. “Three years earlier,” he recalls, “Hubbard spoke before the Eastern Science-Fiction Association in Newark, New Jersey. I don’t recall his exact words. But, in effect, he told us that writing science-fiction for about a penny a word was no way to make a living. If you really want to make a million, he said, the quickest way is to start your own religion.”
and
“The night I heard it, Lester del Rey said you should start a religion. Del Rey had been a stump minister. He was one of the top five or six science fiction writers of the day. Lester also turned out to be one of the great frauds of his day — ‘Lester del Rey’ wasn’t even his name. But he was a very outgoing, garrulous guy, and he said to Ron, you ought to start a religion!
“Right around that time, Reich’s orgone box was fairly popular, and there was a lot of psychiatry talk going on. L. Sprague de Camp was there. Lee Correy — his real name was Jay Stanton. Each of them chipped in a little bit. One chipped in the Reich orgone box, which became the e-meter. Another one chipped in group therapy, which was big at the time. This was right around the time the Kinsey Report came out.
Lester contributed most to the discussion, and out of it came Dianetics. Hubbard got Dianetics going. It didn’t become Scientology until he wanted to get tax exemption,” Ellison says.
Pay the Writer! - ( New Window )
You can call BS on me if you want, but this legit happened 2 years ago:
My son, then a senior in high school, was playing football. There was a few minutes left in the game and his team was running out the clock. He was the trusted RB for this type of situation.
Anyways, he went down with a leg injury, an obvious clean break jusy above the ankle. Two kids on his team threw up on the field, one ran for the ambulance, one - who's Mom was a Dr ran to the crowd and yelled to his Mom - "Mom, its Tim! His leg is snapped! Its disgusting!"
By the time my wife and I got to the sideline, they had him loaded in the ambulance. There was a Dr with the ambulance crew that told us his leg was broken. The coach came over, with the game still going on, to talk to us. He said he saw the whole thing and was pretty shook. He was hoping Tim would be OK for baseball season, which was 6 months away.
From the time he went down with the injury, until we got to the hospital, I prayed.
When he got to the hospital they gave him morphine and took him right in to get XRays. When he got back to the room, I looked at his leg, and it didnt look too bad. Perhaps a little swolen.
Anyways, the Dr came in with the Xrays and told us there was no break. I asked him if he could have a radiologist check, because 5 people and my son himself told me they saw his leg bent at 90 degrees in a place where that waw not possible. He said that wasnt necessary, and sent him home. The next day I took him to the local sports medicine location, which is open on the weekend for sports injuries. They couldnt find a break either and said maybe it was sprained.
He wasnt in much pain, and by Wedesday was back at football practice. He played in the next game, and the rest of the year.
Is there a reasonable explanation for this? We give credit to our God. Is that foolish? Were all the people who saw his injury up close, including a Dr, wrong or does he have magic bones?
At the end of the year football banquet, the coach gave him a special award for "toughness", because in his words he was just hoping Tim would be able to walk again after seeing his injury, much less play in the next game.
The "reasonable" explanation is that eyewitnesses are notoriously wrong about details. Blame the boobs that believed that whab they think they saw was actually happening.
Quote:
In comment 13553762 Pete in 'Vliet said:
Quote:
In comment 13553741 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
theology is stupid. I think there should be a natural curiosity of where we originated and where we are going.
I think what is stupid is using theology to craft and enforce social mores, and that's pretty much what all religions do.
We shouldn't commit adultery out of decency, not because there were supposedly stone tablets saying not to. My issue is that instead of people using common sense to dictate behavior, they are often influenced or guilted into behaviors that have been translated, mutated and misinterpreted from centuries ago.
I feel like I fall into a gray area where I have faith, but no beholdance to religion. I believe in a higher power and am very curious how our origins came about and if there's an afterlife, but I have utter disdain for anyone trying to dictate what my beliefs or behaviors should be. Part of being a human is having the ability to think for oneself and make my own decisions.
At its best - organized religion acts as a support structure for those who can't lead their own way. At its worst, religion is a vehicle (and a protected one at that) to bilk people out of money, brainwash their thinking and control their actions. All organized religions do this in some form.
I agree. I believe in a god or higher power, but don't think any can know the nature of god is or what it wants from us - if anything. That why I think Theology is stupid. That and the fact that it creates wars between peoples who pretty much believe in the same morals anyway.
I get that theology helped to ingrain these morals into barbaric, tribal peoples in ancient and mideivel times. People at those times weren't going to work to build a better society unless they thought it would grant them ever lasting peace after they died. But now we know the benifits of a peaceful society, so I still believe thelogy is stupid.
The true value of religions are the lessons they teach us. Judaism's symbolisms and philosophies, Jesus's sermons and Christianities 7 virtues and deadly sins, Islams Five Pillars, Buddhism's meditations. All have made life a little better where they were taught.
Scientology's lesson is - abandon your family and pay us money then maybe you can be happy.
This sounds very much like the screed that a person who doesn't believe cannot be a moral/ethical person. Absolute horseshit, of course, but it's a very common view, even among those professing to be Atheists.
BMac, that wasn't my intention. These morals lessons from the main religions have been ingrained into society whether you believe in the Theology or not (I don't). You don't need to be a follower to benefit from yhe Golden Rule and the Judgement of Solomon.
Its people that create these lessons, not gods. They just used religion to get everyone to listen back then. You probably never believed Hansel and Grettle were real people, but I bet you still learned as a child not to trust strange old ladies offering candy in the woods.
Its just stories and lessons written by very smart and creative people who were trying to aid society. True many eventually profitted from them, causing rifts that bred new religions that were also eventually perverted for profits - but the stories and morals remain.
I didn't intend to diss you or your viewpoint, it's just that this nonsense is repeated ad nauseum with absolutely no evidence to back it up. it's simply an ingrained belief that sounds good at first hearing, but is belied by the facts.
Not looking to take a shot at you, although I understand how it came off that way. Apologies for my current lack of communication skills.
Bill Maher's Religulous
Quote:
Religion performance ... All you need to know.
Bill Maher's Religulous
Watch Maher's film for entertainment, but not for education. It contains some bad info, like the notion that Jesus is based on the Egyptian god Horus.
That is the exclusive benefit of a religion. Its a fixed thought process that fills a human need for answers, whereas science or non-religious alternatives can change ones worldview via trial and error, or visa versa. Some are less receptive to such dynamics.
Exactly why belief systems, including Scientology, have to come with so many customs and ceremonies kind of escapes me, but I speculate that they serve keep the masses focused on the belief system instead of "competitiors" And the crazier the system, like Scientology, the more control they need to exert.
Scientology is a cult, plain and simple.
Quote:
In comment 13553705 Sec 103 said:
Quote:
Religion performance ... All you need to know.
Bill Maher's Religulous
Watch Maher's film for entertainment, but not for education. It contains some bad info, like the notion that Jesus is based on the Egyptian god Horus.
He doesn't say he's based on Horus, just points out that there are too many similarities to be coincidence. The early church subsumed many features from other religions, going so far as to take pagan rituals and "christionizing" them.
Quote:
In comment 13554410 SHO'NUFF said:
Quote:
In comment 13553705 Sec 103 said:
Quote:
Religion performance ... All you need to know.
Bill Maher's Religulous
Watch Maher's film for entertainment, but not for education. It contains some bad info, like the notion that Jesus is based on the Egyptian god Horus.
He doesn't say he's based on Horus, just points out that there are too many similarities to be coincidence. The early church subsumed many features from other religions, going so far as to take pagan rituals and "christionizing" them.
Except each "coincidence" is an extreme stretch of imagination, to be kind. And the overall implication is, indeed, that Jesus is based on Horus.
Scholars of comparative religion largely dismiss the comparisons between Jesus and Horus. It doesn't strengthen Maher's polemic (not "documentary") to include things like that.
Scientology is a cult, plain and simple.
I wouldn't say that. All religions have "cultish" sects to them, for lack of a better term.
Quote:
is an insult to religions.
Scientology is a cult, plain and simple.
I wouldn't say that. All religions have "cultish" sects to them, for lack of a better term.
Not just cultish sects to them, that's being polite.
for some people it's far more outlandish to believe that Jesus was born via immaculate conception, or that Jesus turned water to wine or any of this other miracles, or that he was actually resurrected or that Moses parted the red sea, that god gave him two stone tablets with 10 things man shouldn't do, or any of the other "miracles" of religion than anything in Scientology.
or the concept of god in general, someone referenced Carlin earlier, and he has some great segments about religion, that man believes there is an invisible man in the sky who watches everything we do and we can't do these 10 things and we have to give him money. google Carlin religion youtube and watch it, it's sort of enlightening what people are willing to believe for comfort.
and I feel like I need to add this disclaimer, I don't mean to offend anyone believe what you want, but maybe look at yourself and your beliefs before calling something else a cult or crazy and judging them.
Hari Krishnas do, and how much different is that?
Hari Krishnas do, and how much different is that?
+1 -- well said.
"For many years, the unofficial policy of the Sea Org was to coerce women to have abortions. There are NUMEROUS heartbreaking and CONSISTENT stories that confirm this."
Apparently this policy has been 'eased', but I'm not sure I even believe that.
Link - ( New Window )
There are some other facts about the religion and its founder that also put the entire thing into question.
Namely, it's a fact that LRH is one of the most prolific writers of fiction in history. He had a passion for sci-fi.
Think about that.
But the additional point (stated fact, actually) many have noted on this thread is that every other faith is, too.
Of course different ones have engendered different consequences now and historically, but obviously they're all equally fictitious.
My point was that Scientology would seem to be in an area somewhat its own inside that circle.
For instance, there's evidence to suggest that the very origin of Scientology as a religion was a hoax that its creator knew to be patently bullshit purposely designed to fuck people out of money.
At a minimum, other religions were by and large created/founded with either positive intentions or the genuine feeling of need to answer some fundamental questions.
There's a big difference in that, to me.
But the additional point (stated fact, actually) many have noted on this thread is that every other faith is, too.
Of course different ones have engendered different consequences now and historically, but obviously they're all equally fictitious.
Spoiler alert: David Miscavage doesn't come out looking very good.
Tampa Bay Times Reports on Scientology - ( New Window )
How's it going Admiral?
I'd love to know what those ribbons are for.
Freakshow
Quote:
In comment 13554657 Mr. Bungle said:
Quote:
In comment 13554410 SHO'NUFF said:
Quote:
In comment 13553705 Sec 103 said:
Quote:
Religion performance ... All you need to know.
Bill Maher's Religulous
Watch Maher's film for entertainment, but not for education. It contains some bad info, like the notion that Jesus is based on the Egyptian god Horus.
He doesn't say he's based on Horus, just points out that there are too many similarities to be coincidence. The early church subsumed many features from other religions, going so far as to take pagan rituals and "christionizing" them.
Except each "coincidence" is an extreme stretch of imagination, to be kind. And the overall implication is, indeed, that Jesus is based on Horus.
Scholars of comparative religion largely dismiss the comparisons between Jesus and Horus. It doesn't strengthen Maher's polemic (not "documentary") to include things like that.
It's your inference, not his implication.